Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 901

On May 04 2011 14:06 Whitewing wrote:


Except that neither of them are fair. You want to play ultra safe and never risk dying to early aggression? Then play defensively, and don't go balls to the walls econ. You want a really strong econ? Then go balls to the walls econ and risk dying to early aggression.

You get three choices: Econ, Military Power, Tech. You can have any one in large amounts to the detriment of the other two. You can have two in medium amounts, you can't have all three, and you can't have two in large amounts.

Protoss and Terran are basically choosing either high econ, or high tech, or high military every game against zerg, and zergs are trying to go econ/military at the same time. They're going to fall behind in one of the two, that's the way the game actually works, and that's how it should work. Zerg would be overpowered as shit if they got to have Econ and Military in huge amounts. Hell, they already have the best econ growth rate of all three races.

You want a guaranteed scout that there's nothing the opponent can do to prevent? Protoss can't scout until hallucinate or observer, terran can scan and either whiff or get lucky, but it costs them 270 minerals each time. They can go air and fly around, but that can get stopped as easily as an overlord can. I might agree that overlord speed should be a hatchery available upgrade, but that's about all I can see.

On May 04 2011 14:14 Jotoco wrote:



Nope.

If he does a risky/all in build and you SCOUT IT IN TIME, you should be ahead. If EVERY TIME I go for a risky/ all in and my opponent goes eco I am ahead, then it is a coin flip and there is no need to play the game, we always could just flip coins and award the money.

Like Rock/Paper/Scissors. It is perfectly balanced, but there is NO WAY it can be a competitive sport, because there is no skill involved. You choose a "weapon" and the you either win or lose. If it happened in SC2 (you choose a build and either win or lose there) then it is no point to play!



NO, that is NOT the ideal solution. The ideal solution is 2: A way to scout and respond correctly. But either of the two answers provide a balanced game.

Their approach is different, 1 (having a build that CAN defend anything) assumes the difference in outcomes comes from MICRO, NOT BUILD ORDER WIN.
2 (having scouting possible) assumes good scouting and a good reaction time will get you safe.

BOTH will have a balanced game as an outcome, but you people don't really want to use your brains to think about it.